Thread: Are the Vikings running out of offense?

The Dropper wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

marstc09 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Thanks for the read my friend. Only true column I actually look forward to reading anymore. :laugh:

As always, a comment or two for you.....

a. @ Cleveland. Not a great showing. Grass, Outside, Away.
b. @ St Louis. Great showing. Turf, Inside, Away.
c. @ Pittsburg. Not a great showing. Grass, Outside, Away.
d. @ GB. Great Showing. Grass, Outside, Away.
e. @ Arizona. Not a great showing. Grass, Inside, Away.

Threw the GB game in there as a wildcard, not scientific mind you, but it does appear to me that we might just be a team built to win inside and on turf and a .500 team (slightly better) on the road/grass.

I for one, will be watching with earnest as we face the Bores next week.

I made this similar comment a week ago. I to will be watching with great interest. We need that #2 seed.

I knew someone did.

Time to find the "Mudders" on the team and let them play if the "Non Mudders" aren't getting it done.

You think this team has any "mudders?" Hope you're right.

Anyways, I don't think we'll need 'em for the Bears. Perhaps the "wildcard" as you call it, is really just the fact that it was a division game (and against Favre's old team, of course), which means the team was just a bit more fired up generally. If so, the Vikes should whup the Bears good & proper this week.

But this bit about playing on grass is highly disconcerting. Perhaps it's nothing. But the Vikes need lose only one more game (entirely possible) and have the Iggles win out (also very possible--Denver @home, then @Dallas) and we could be looking at January in Philly. That is NOT a game the Vikes want to be playing.

Good post my friend. Have you been missing in action of late or have I just been missing your posts.....

Anyway, Your probably correct. No "Mudders" on this team.

Funny thing though, when you look at a team, how it has a identity, and then, all of a sudden that identity is gone.

Steelers are the most recent team that comes to mind.

I think they are finally figuring out how to be a "Mudder" team again (run first, pass second). Maybe that is what our problem is. Got to reliant on the pass and now we can't run (Mud) anymore.

Anyway, its sure is a head scratcher.

The Dropper wrote:

But the Vikes need lose only one more game (entirely possible) and have the Iggles win out (also very possible--Denver @home, then @Dallas) and we could be looking at January in Philly. That is NOT a game the Vikes want to be playing.

omg that would be a disaster, could you imagine our defense matched up against DeSean Jackson??? We'd lose by 60.

I don't think it is a matter of the Vikings running out of "offense".. but I think some of the warning signs prior to the Favre signing are starting to creep into the picture.

Go back to the massive Favre thread where a couple of us Packer fans pointed to the fact the Childress won't be able to keep Favre within the playbook and Favre will not heed the coach.

Point is.. Brett is freelancing more and more.. IMO, making the Vikings more pass oriented and taking balance out of this offensive attack. And that balance the Vikings have, with the stable of athletes at WR and RB is probably close to the best in the NFL.. but is being handcuffed to a point at the line of scrimmage. Couple that with a offensive line that can be beaten by a pass rush.. that lack of balance is being magnified.


And as your fanbase will find out over the course of the next couple of weeks.. there is little Chilly can do about it (what the Packers knew 2 years ago and experienced first hand).. he lacks the nads to straight out bench Favre.. and honestly.. he hitched his wagon to that steer early without much room for wiggle.. might as well have married Brett at the airport when he picked him up.

Buckle in folks.. I am not sure how this is going to turn out.. I am not sold that it is headed for a crash.. but the ride is going to get bumpy with Childress testing Favre this late in the season.

You can talk about being a dome team or a turf team all you want.. this team has the horses to buckle it up on any surface...

BTW.. not trying to stir it up.. more so give an outside observation without the purple tint.

pack93z wrote:

I don't think it is a matter of the Vikings running out of "offense".. but I think some of the warning signs prior to the Favre signing are starting to creep into the picture.

Go back to the massive Favre thread where a couple of us Packer fans pointed to the fact the Childress won't be able to keep Favre within the playbook and Favre will not heed the coach.

Point is.. Brett is freelancing more and more.. IMO, making the Vikings more pass oriented and taking balance out of this offensive attack. And that balance the Vikings have, with the stable of athletes at WR and RB is probably close to the best in the NFL.. but is being handcuffed to a point at the line of scrimmage. Couple that with a offensive line that can be beaten by a pass rush.. that lack of balance is being magnified.


And as your fanbase will find out over the course of the next couple of weeks.. there is little Chilly can do about it (what the Packers knew 2 years ago and experienced first hand).. he lacks the nads to straight out bench Favre.. and honestly.. he hitched his wagon to that steer early without much room for wiggle.. might as well have married Brett at the airport when he picked him up.

Buckle in folks.. I am not sure how this is going to turn out.. I am not sold that it is headed for a crash.. but the ride is going to get bumpy with Childress testing Favre this late in the season.

You can talk about being a dome team or a turf team all you want.. this team has the horses to buckle it up on any surface...

BTW.. not trying to stir it up.. more so give an outside observation without the purple tint.

It is good to have you back my friend. Feel free to stir away. You know I like it. B)

Just a gentle reminder though, there has been a small contingent on here who agreed with you as does this author.
A complete guide to Favre's 21st century disasters
A stat of interest that I've been poking in every now and then the last few games......

Last Five Games Since 2005 - 11TD, 34INT :kiss:

Has anybody noticed that the 2 out of the 3 games that the Vikes lost have been night games? I talked to somebody that is close to some of the players and they stated that they play better during day games because the players are locked down the night before so they can be rested to play the following day. When it's a night game, players can do whatever the night before and have have the day of the game to recuperate from whatever they did the night before. Lets just say that some player take total advantage of this and might go out clubbing or drinking the night before the game. Look at some of the players during these night games, they look total drained and/or totally out of it. Don't take my word for it but it just makes sense from what I have been told.

Marrdro wrote:

Thanks for the read my friend. Only true column I actually look forward to reading anymore. :laugh:

As always, a comment or two for you.....

a. @ Cleveland. Not a great showing. Grass, Outside, Away.
b. @ St Louis. Great showing. Turf, Inside, Away.
c. @ Pittsburg. Not a great showing. Grass, Outside, Away.
d. @ GB. Great Showing. Grass, Outside, Away.
e. @ Arizona. Not a great showing. Grass, Inside, Away.

Threw the GB game in there as a wildcard, not scientific mind you, but it does appear to me that we might just be a team built to win inside and on turf and a .500 team (slightly better) on the road/grass.

I for one, will be watching with earnest as we face the Bores next week.

Favre also played in Green Bay for 100 years. So that could also be why.

pack93z wrote:

I don't think it is a matter of the Vikings running out of "offense".. but I think some of the warning signs prior to the Favre signing are starting to creep into the picture.

Go back to the massive Favre thread where a couple of us Packer fans pointed to the fact the Childress won't be able to keep Favre within the playbook and Favre will not heed the coach.

Point is.. Brett is freelancing more and more.. IMO, making the Vikings more pass oriented and taking balance out of this offensive attack. And that balance the Vikings have, with the stable of athletes at WR and RB is probably close to the best in the NFL.. but is being handcuffed to a point at the line of scrimmage. Couple that with a offensive line that can be beaten by a pass rush.. that lack of balance is being magnified.


And as your fanbase will find out over the course of the next couple of weeks.. there is little Chilly can do about it (what the Packers knew 2 years ago and experienced first hand).. he lacks the nads to straight out bench Favre.. and honestly.. he hitched his wagon to that steer early without much room for wiggle.. might as well have married Brett at the airport when he picked him up.

Buckle in folks.. I am not sure how this is going to turn out.. I am not sold that it is headed for a crash.. but the ride is going to get bumpy with Childress testing Favre this late in the season.

You can talk about being a dome team or a turf team all you want.. this team has the horses to buckle it up on any surface...

BTW.. not trying to stir it up.. more so give an outside observation without the purple tint.

I agree with much of this & if Childress doesn't have the cajones to bench Favre, the Vikings are in trouble.

Getting manhandled by the Cards and Panthers is downright embarrassing. It is made even moreso because of the fact that the Vikings have the talent to roll with anyone.

It bothers the hell out of me that the Cards and Julius Peppers decided to play the game of the year when the Vikings came to town but the way the Vikings beat the Bengals gave me some hope. At this point though, the Vikings will have to win out and win out convincingly before I believe they can win the Super Bowl.

I agree, we need to build some confidence and regain some of the swagger from earlier in the year.

I didn't see the Arizona game but if it was anything like Carolina we were manhandled and didn't click. Now sometime this happens. Biggest worry for me is the head coach not being able to bench a player when he needs it.

What happens when he wants to sit any of the other high profilers? are they going to say the smae thing? As for running out of offence AP just has not been the same player and I can't tell if its him or the line. We missed harvin and it was maybe his lack of game action that slowed him down some.

What we can't overlook is that maybe just maybe both of those teams called a perfect game against us, scoped our offence and our defence and knew how to exploit it. We allowed a 100 yard rusher as well and I hope that these two games will re focus the team on what needs to be done to obtain 2nd seed and 1st round bye.

My biggest fear is that we meet the pukers in the playoffs and lose, the regular season sweep will become a bitter taste.

VikesFan787 wrote:

Marrdro wrote:

Thanks for the read my friend. Only true column I actually look forward to reading anymore. :laugh:

As always, a comment or two for you.....

a. @ Cleveland. Not a great showing. Grass, Outside, Away.
b. @ St Louis. Great showing. Turf, Inside, Away.
c. @ Pittsburg. Not a great showing. Grass, Outside, Away.
d. @ GB. Great Showing. Grass, Outside, Away.
e. @ Arizona. Not a great showing. Grass, Inside, Away.

Threw the GB game in there as a wildcard, not scientific mind you, but it does appear to me that we might just be a team built to win inside and on turf and a .500 team (slightly better) on the road/grass.

I for one, will be watching with earnest as we face the Bores next week.

Favre also played in Green Bay for 100 years. So that could also be why.

Hope your right my friend and some of that translates over to the Bores game this weekend. He's played there a ton as well.

I don't know why everyone wants to make it so complicated.

Run the ball more.

Quantity Rushing. Quality Passing.

-V-